S Corp Distributions V. Compensation Essay

2272 words - 10 pages

Introduction
S corporations are required to annually file Form 1120S, U.S. Income Tax Return for an S Corporation, although they generally are not subject to federal income taxes. Instead, an S corporation passes its profits and net losses to the shareholders, who are required to report the items on their individual income tax returns. This distribution of the flow-through income, deductions, and other items are reported to the shareholder and the Internal Revenue Service on Form 1120S Schedule K-1, Shareholder’s Share of Income, Deductions, Credits, etc.
S corporation is one of the fastest growing types of business entities and the most common type of corporate entity filing returns ...view middle of the document...

History
Revenue Ruling 59-221 first held that a shareholder’s undistributed share of S corporation income is not treated as self-employment income (Nutti, 2011). This has not stopped the IRS, however, from contesting attempts by S corporation shareholder-employees to minimize compensation in favor of distributions. In Revenue Ruling 74-44, IRS first challenged the payment of reasonable salaries to an S corporation that paid dividends but no compensation to shareholders who provided services to the corporation.
Since then, there have been more than two dozen reasonable compensation cases that have come through the Tax Court and the taxpayer has not fared well. In most of them, the sole or majority shareholder of a corporation provides substantial services to the corporation, but shuns salary in favor of distributions. The IRS challenges the treatment and re-characterizes all the distribution as compensation, holding the taxpayer liable for payroll taxes. The Tax Court applies the employment tax statute, holds the shareholder to be an employee, and agrees that the entire distribution should be taxed as compensation.
In more recent years, cases have been against S corporations in which the shareholder-employee has taken some compensation. This has forced the Court to make a determination whether the amount was reasonable or if distributions made throughout the year should be re-characterized as salary and be subject to payroll taxes.
In one such defining case, Jeffrey Dahl was the sole shareholder of JD & Associates, an accounting firm. Mr. Dahl, a CPA, drew salaries of $19,000 (1997) and $30,000 (1998 and 1999). Distributions to Dahl for those same years were $47,000, $50,000 and $50,000 respectively.
Asserting that Dahl’s compensation was unreasonably low, the IRS used the services of a certified valuation engineer to determine reasonable compensation for Dahl’s services. Using the Risk Management Association’s Annual Statement Studies in comparison of JDA and Mr. Dahl to other accounting firms with comparable asset levels, the IRS’s expert testified that JDS was more profitable than its peers while Mr. Dahl’s compensation was 166% - 266% less than those same peers.
The IRS determined reasonable compensation to be $69,584 in 1997, $79,823 in 1998, and $79,711 in 1999. The District Court agreed and re-characterized distribution to compensation of $42,827, $33,072, and $35,582.
David Watson, another CPA, was the sole shareholder and employee of an S corporation that was a 25% shareholder in his very successful accounting firm. Mr. Watson’s share of the revenue generated in the firm was allocated to his S corporation, which paid him a salary and distributions. For 2002 and 2003, Mr. Watson set his salary as $24,000 for each year, while receiving distributions of $203,651 and $175,470 respectively.
Again the IRS maintained the Mr. Watson’s compensation was unreasonably low based on the services of the same expert from the...

1253 words - 6 pages
category of exceptions is supported by various statues including, liability for use of prohibited names in s.216 Insolvency Act 1986, Fraudulent Trading in s.213 Insolvency Act 1986 and wrongful trading in s.214 Insolvency Act 1986.
On the other hand, in the group company scenario like VTB Capital Plc v. Nutritek International Corp and Others and Prest v Petrodel Resources Limited and others, it has always come under most of the attack due to

4546 words - 19 pages
to be in the best interests of the company:
--S180(1) – a reasonably careful and diligent director or officer in the position of defendant would not have caused ..
-- S181—the duties to act in good faith in the best interest of the coy and for a proper purpose
--S182 – the duty not to improperly use his position as a director
-- S183
* S 180(2) – business judgement rule – Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Rich

2473 words - 10 pages
organization desires.
v. 201102 | 3
Introduction
With our organization reaching over 100 employees in many different salary levels we
must evaluate the best possible compensation strategy for our organization. In this report, the
various compensation strategies and recommendations for implementation will be displayed.
One of the greatest tasks for any organization is to find proper compensation schemes that will
insure the acquiring and

5460 words - 22 pages
|
CEO Compensation |
|
|
|
Jade Duan |
5/12/2012 |
|
INTRODUCTION
Over the past a few decades, executive pay has risen dramatically in the United States. As of 1960, the average CEO at a large corporation made approximately $190,000 (equivalent to approximately $1.3 million today). The 1990s saw one of the greatest wealth transfers in history, as CEO pay skyrocketed. S&P companies CEO pay went from 1993 average of $3.7

2102 words - 9 pages
,
the
business
is
owned
by
shareholders.
This
will
allow
the
business
to
continue
upon
death
of
a
shareholder.
S-­‐Corporation:
• Type
of
Corporation
–
The
S-­‐Corp
is
a
blend
of
a
C-­‐Corp
and
a
partnership.
S-­‐Corps
are
formed
much
like
a
C-­‐Corp
and
have

1094 words - 5 pages
a K – 1 that contains the appropriate percentage of income/loss (IRS).
Part V:
The distribution of income or loss would be done based on your agreed upon percentages that should be in your bylaws. You can elect to be equally or based on your capital contribution. But make sure that you are paying yourself a reasonable amount of compensation for your any work conducted for the business because not doing so will send red flags to the IRS because

710 words - 3 pages
Title VII of the Civil Rights |McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green |This law prohibits employment |Applies to employers with 15 or more |
|Equal Employment Opportunity Act |Act of 1964 granting enforcement power|(1973) |discrimination which could result in |employees and the local or state |
| |to the Equal Employment Opportunity

Related Essays

1473 words - 6 pages
incident. What makes the S Corp different from a traditional corporation (C Corp) is that profits and losses can pass through to your personal tax return. Consequently, the business is not taxed itself. Only the shareholders are taxed. There is an important caveat, any shareholder who works for the company must pay him or herself "reasonable compensation." Basically, the shareholder must be paid fair market value, or the IRS might reclassify any

2834 words - 12 pages
provide IPG's long-term investors with much deserved liquidity (Gapontsev, 2007). The following chart portrays the company's 2012 sales distributions by end-user applications and geographic locations, from their Fourth Quarter 2012 Corporate Fact Sheet. As one can see the primary market for IPG Corp.'s fiber laser's is largely in materials processing, 88%, with telecommunications, medical, and advanced technologies making up the remaining 12

2162 words - 9 pages
are three issues at hand, the first is the $5 million dollars received in conjunction with the 5% of the corporationâ€™s earnings not to exceed $5 million, is this unreasonable compensation or should it have dividends as the IRS claims. The second is the sale of stock, should this be treated as a sale in accordance with IRC section 302 or IRC 301? The third issue is the rental loss on the taxpayers personally owned building being rented to the